tv Fox News Sunday With Chris Wallace FOX News October 29, 2017 11:00am-12:00pm PDT
we spent some time there, when you get in the water? >> hopefully we are coming out of the wanted and the negative retentive shot. when you have a story that includes raw sewage and swimming hope it is years apart rather than just like a few months. "fox news sunday" is next. it has been great having you. >> goodbye everyone. >> i am chris wallace. when you're after the 2016 election was hillary clinton and the democrats occluded with the russians? >> and she denied it. her own people denied it. everyone denied it. and now they are scooting around trying to figure out what to say. >> who in the clinton campaign approved pain for the russian dossier on donald trump and did they break the law?and was a collision with the trump campaign. we'll ask the chair oversight committee only on "fox news sunday". >> ran the gop revolt. it's obvious his political
model is to survive. perfect children and presence of the answer to. an office of president i will be not be silent. >> like the republican effect on the present me for the future of the party? will talk with ohio governor john kasich. a trump critic. it is a "fox news sunday" exclusive. plus, the president and the republicans. still looking for their first big legislative win. >> this budget hasn't has a things are one step closer to historic tax reform. >> will ask our panel if they can make good on the panel of big tax cuts by the end of the year. and our power players of the week. showing the struggles that the nation's heroes face when they come home. all right now on "fox news sunday". hello again from fox news in
washington. we begin with the latest reports of at least one person has been charged in connection with special counsel robert mueller's investigation. into the russian meddling in the 2016 election. the reports say a federal grand jury approved the charges friday. those charges have been sealed by a judge and anyone facing charges can be taken into custody as soon has to tomorrow. meanwhile house republicans are launching new investigations into hillary clinton. including the revelation that her campaign and the democratic national committee paper opposition research that led to the russian dossier that accused the trump campaign of collision with the russians gudrun is now we have congressman -- chairman of the house oversight committee. let's talk about the news outlets that the first charges will be announced tomorrow as a former prosecutor yourself, what will you be looking for?
>> first of all chris, we do not know who is being charged. let's assume the reporting is true. we do not know who is being true, we don't know what they are being charged for. the only conversation i was robert mueller was discussing cutting out the leaks with respect to the series investigations. it is ironic that the people charged with investigating the law in executing the law would violate the law and make no mistake, disclosing grand jury material is a violation of the law. as a former prosecutor i'm disappointed that we are having this conversation. there are so many that violated ãsomebody violated their oath of secrecy. >> as a federal prosecutor, you are quite right. we do not know who has been charged and what they are being charged for. what, if anything, when we find that out ãwhether is some close to the present or further down or if they are related to rush out work went the charge.
not to say it is not legitimate but something like fraud or money laundering. what will that tell us about the mueller investigation? >> the little phrase from rod rosenstein, ambrose may arise from the investigation. the reason you have that is that if special counsel finds evidence unrelated to his or her original jurisdiction you do not ignore it. but it will be really important whether or not this indictment involves 15-year-olds business transactions for 15-day-old conversations with russia. so it's really important what the charge is. it is really important for the person being charged is. one thing i do not get that excited about although i do see a lot of reporting is somehow or another, you will be able to flip a witness and the witness will turned states evidence on everyone else. if he did not believe a witness yesterday, chances are you will
not believe that witness tomorrow. particularly if they are under indictment and have reason to -- with the government. this comes down to documents much more than witness testimony precaution of yours, don't get too excited that all of a sudden the government has a star witness. the star witness he probably did not believe one week ago and you will not believe one week from now. >> there have been growing calls from some republicans to end the mueller investigation. some people say he is too close to james comey and the fbi in that he ought to resign. some people say that when the mueller budget for the special counsel investigation has presented to congress to review, next month, that they should cut all funding. do you support any effort to either curtail or end the mueller investigation? >> i do not. and i readily concede on a small group of republicans. i think that bob mueller is a
distinguished career of service to the country. i do nothing any of your viewers can think of a single thing he did is the fbi director that cause them to have a lack of confidence in him. i think most of your viewers have to be reminded that he actually was the fbi director or exit was the us attorney because he is a pretty apolitical guy. i see the reporting, i see that same thing that you are making reference to the hay and james comey of friends. i'm not really sure what the definition of that is. i have got a lot of coworkers. it would not stop me from investigating them or prosecuting them. so they are not family members. they were not business partners. i would encourage my republican friends, give the guy a chance to do his job. the result will be known by the facts.by what he uncovers. the personalities involved are much less important to me than the underlying facts. i would say give the guy a chance to do his job. >> let's turn to the revelation
this week that it turns out that the clinton campaign in the democratic national committee paid for the opposition research that led to the formulation of this russia dossier that makes all kinds of accusations against the president and his campaign. what do you think is the significance of the revelation? >> one of the areas of significance chris is just how far the democrats and congress fault republicans are trying to get access to the information. if it were to adam schiff and other crowds, they would want all the facts to come out. all of the facts of russia to come out except who financed the dossier. so that is the most important thing to me, how unserious the democrats and the house have been about uncovering all of the facts. i'm interested in who paid for the dossier because it helps you understand motive and intent more than if you can rely on the document i am much more interested in whether or not the department of justice in the fbi relied upon not dossier and initiating counterintelligence
investigation or in court filings. that is really important to me. i do not expect them to be objective of almost by definition opposition research is not objective. i do expect an entity represented by a blindfolded woman to be objective and if they relied on the dossier and if they did not corroborate it, or it, then we have a serious issue and that is the next thing the house intel is trying to find out. whether or not the us government relied on it. question two points you are making inch, there are two important questions. to the fbi bases original investigation at least in part of the dossier and we talk about court representations, that is the possibility that they use the dossier to convince a court to allow the fbi to wiretap people in trump world. you have evidence about, i understand the investigation is
just beginning. >> actually investigation is not just beginning.we have been trying for a long time to the department of justice to give us access to this information. frankly it took the speaker of the house, this week, to tell the department that we are not going away.chris, people don't like it when i say this but it's true. it is sometimes hard to tell the difference between the obama department of justice and the current department of justice in terms of transparency and their willingness to share information with congress. this is a really simple request. did you rely on the dossier and if so, did you get it before you relied upon it? you can answer that 30 seconds but it has taken three months for the department of justice and only recently have they agreed to give us the information. the battle is not just with house democrats unfortunately it is also with the department of justice. gaining access information that we need to wrap up the investigation. >> what about the fact that the
clinton campaign and the dnc, which pay 12 man dollars to the law firm for that -- the paper the researcher led to the dossier that filings it simply says 12 man dollars called the law firm for legal work. no mention to the dr. they were also paying for research that went to christopher steele, a former british intelligence agent that went to the kremlin, not the money but the investigation. as i understand it, the willful misrepresentation of campaign expenditures is a criminal offense. >> i am not an expert but the good news is you don't have to be to understand the absurdity of believing that you can launder all of your campaign money by just hiring a law firm. i mean imagine if you and i were running for congress and we just hired a law firm that said you go do all of this, go by all of the television, go by all of the bumper stickers, go higher on the experience and we will launder all of this through a law firm.
i can't think of anything that defeats the purpose of transparency laws more than that. so i'm interested in that.i'm all interested ãalso interested in folks at the dnc because no one can remember who paid $10 million to a law firm to do the research. i find it funny. $10 million and no one can remember who authorized it, approved it, who said yes, this is a good idea! you have two issues. a memory issue and then the lack of transparency by laundering money to a law firm. >> we are running out of time but i want to ask you two more questions. you also have the kind -- an investigation into the uranium one deal. 20 percent of america's uranium reserves ended up going to a russian government agency. hillary clinton responded this week to all of this talk about her. i like to play a clip of her.
>> the close of the investigation about real russian ties between donald trump associates and real russians, the more that they want to just throw mud on the wall and i am their favorite target. me and president obama. we are the ones that they like to put into the crosshairs. >> secretary clinton and other democrats are saying that you and the republicans are just trying to shift the conversation. >> chris, always back in 2010 peter king and eliana ross, sent a letter trying to better understand this transaction. in 2015 the house oversight committee also wrote the obama administration trying to understand what they did, whether or not they had all the information. but also keep in mind, we spent most of 2017 trying to better understand what russia did to this country and 2016. not to the democrats, not to the republicans but to the
country. we know that russia was not our friend in 2016. it is not that big of a leap to ask if they were our friends at 2010. it is not that big of a leap. it was not republicans who gave the reset button to russia. it was not republicans that say we will have more flexibility in a second term. it was a republican named mitt romney that said russia was our greatest threat. and the democrats back to him. so yes, i do want to know if the same group that tried to sabotage our democracy in 2016 is buying uranium in 2010. i want to know that. >> okay two quick questions to wrap up. on the one hand, given the revelations about the fact that the dnc and the clinton campaign paid for the russia dossier, do we at this point have harder evidence of collusion between clinton and the russians than we do about trump and the russians? >> chris, there are words that start with c collusion
coordination conspiracy contact and coincidence. and where this falls out in those five, i don't know. collusion has a criminal connotation to it. your question is accurate. for a long time we have heard about all the ties between the trump campaign in russia for which there is no evidence. then despite serious democrat opposition, we have uncovered that the dnc was red with russian actors to destroy donald trump's reputation. so it is interesting when there is collusion, coordination, i don't know yet. >> we do know is you point out that if the russians did interfere, they did at the dnc files, they did hack and put out information about john podesta's files, don't we need to get to the bottom of that also? >> i spent the better part of 2017 he that appeared including witnesses interviewed last
week. i have more this week. russia is not our friend. wikileaks is not our friend, they tried to attack the fundamentals of our democracy. that is what i have spent 2017 focusing on here that to me is an american issue. i wish the democrats would help a little more instead of reading the moscow phonebook during witness interviews trying to see whether jared kushner knows a guy named igor. my focus in 2017 is understanding that russia try to subvert our democracy and it would be great if my democrat friends helped a little bit. >> chairman trey gowdy, thank you and we will follow all of the investigations in the coming days. >> yes, sir. thank you. >> coming up next will discuss the newest developments in the russian story. and what would you like to ask our panel about the fencing and dnc connections to moscow? just go to facebook, twitter on "fox news sunday". we may answer your question on the air. the delicious classics you love,
>> tech: so you think this chip is nothing to worry about? well at safelite, we know sooner or later every chip will crack. these friends were on a trip when their windshield got chipped. so they scheduled at safelite.com. they didn't have to change their plans or worry about a thing. i'll see you all in a little bit. and i fixed it right away with a strong repair they can trust. plus, with most insurance a safelite repair is no cost to you. >> customer: really?! >> tech: being there whenever you need us that's another safelite advantage. >> singers: safelite repair, safelite replace. >> when you look at all of this
is all turned around. the president this week thing of the real russian scandal involves hillary clinton and the democrats. now there are reports a federal grand jury has approved the first charges in robert mueller's investigation. it is time now for our sunday group. the head of heritage action for america, michael needham, mo elleithee georgetown university's institute of politics and public service, over democratic congresswoman jane harman director of the woodrow wilson center. and ari fleischer former white house press secretary.
under george w. bush. you're a very distinguished and long titles! [laughter] michael let me begin with you. what you make of these reports that special counsel mueller has the first charges filed by a grand jury in his investigation and that whoever is being charged may be taken into custody tomorrow? >> i think that what i tried to say all year, i think the responsible position has been to allow the investigations to play out and see with the special prosecutor comes up with. not to speculate in advance. we do not know what will happen tomorrow, if anything will happen to market if the reports are correct. the investigation should allow itself to play out. the country has the right to know what russia, an enemy of the united states, has done to undermine our democracy. as we get to the second part of the panel we certainly have the right to know what other things
have gone on with uranium, the russians and democrats. we should allow the information to come out and evaluated when we know what we are evaluating and maybe we'll find out more tomorrow. >> congresswoman jane harman, just to pick up on michael's point. we don't know who is being charged over there being charged for. but assuming the reports are correct, and indictments are issued and announced tomorrow, ones that give robert mueller more running room to continue his investigation? >> it probably will and i applaud what trey gowdy just sit on your program to that he supports robert mueller. i think that is where this investigation needs to go. sadly it is running out of steam on capitol hill i think they are entitled to more information. but i think robert mueller has excellent credentials and he is one of the few people that the country seems to trust her now that congress is at 80 percent mistrust and the trump administrations at 70 percent distress. >> let me go to the other side
of this. there's only so much we can talk about something we have no idea what is going to happen. although that has never really stopped us! [laughter] i want to talk to the revelation that it turns out that it was the clinton campaign and it was a democratic national committee that paid for the opposition research that led to the russia dossier. democrats say that the republicans focus on that and also on the uranium january 20, -- 2010 deal. >> and apparently there is more interest in what happened seven years ago with secretary clinton then there is in the russia investigation. and that is by design. >> what do you think, ari fleischer on that comment. and the clip that i played from trey gowdy from clinton >> i think it shows that there is something wrong with russia it is a one-way street. that if it involved republicans
look the other way and if that was involving democrats then don't. i think some people have gone too far and they are reaping what they sowed. we have a modern-day scare about russia. so the point now where it uranium transaction, there may or may not have been legitimate and it is now subject to scrutiny because it involves russia.russia is a problem, it is an enemy of ours but we can also work with them on certain things. but when you listen to the rhetoric that has been created everything that touches russia is now suspect in hillary and her people have not gotten caught in the web that they created. >> but isn't there a legitimate concern about the uranium one investigation? we do not have hard evidence. and fox news has been reporting on this for a couple of years now. the fact is that people involved in the uranium one deal paid millions of dollars to the clinton foundation, bill clinton gets a half-million dollars speaking fee, right at the time this is all coming
down in 2010. is not worth looking at? >> yes and i think it raises more questions about the clinton foundation and the governmental process. i don't know if the deal was legitimate but i do know the issue about the dossier and that it was paid for by the clinton campaign is a serious issue. as vanity fair reported in march 2017, the source paid was a senior russian foreign minister figure in sores b was a former top level officer still active in the kremlin. we do not at the clinton administration paid a foreign operative to get information on the kremlin on donald trump. that was usually kremlin to get dirt on your opponent. >> we ask you for questions for the panel. on this issue of the clintons and how involved they were with russia, dave pearson sent us on facebook, when is a second special counsel going to be appointed to completely investigate the correction of the dnc and the clintons with their russian collision? how do you answer that mo elleithee? >> ari and i tend to agree with each other.
recently, this is more i think we disagree but i think the uranium one story is one that has been litigated. over and over. over the past few years. it has been difficult.we know facts that secretary clinton was not directly involved. in fact it was nine different agencies that had to approve this. we know for a fact that the major donor they are referring to in here is someone who disassociate themselves from both the company three years before the deal and before she became secretary >> the fbi informant who clinton or rather the lynch justice department, the obama justice department put a gag order on who now finally is going to be allowed to testify for congress. according to his lawyer, has information about bribery and also about clinton involvement in the uranium one deal. >> the point i'm making is that over and over, the story has been looked at.and more information may come out.
but over and over, you can look at ãthere really is not new information that came out this week.i do believe there is a coordinated effort. to try and muddy the waters around what mueller is doing. and try to overly confuse the situation. that is something democrats have done the past and is something we haven't [multiple speakers] >> but the dossier and the effort that led to the dossier, that is not new information? >> it'd been widely reported that democrats paid for this after republicans paid for it. the reset that went into it. that republicans [multiple speakers] >> i don't know you're talking about! they denied that he had any involvement in the dossier. this is the person of perkins and called to give all of the money to christopher steele that led to this.
how can you say we knew that? >> and senate had been widely reported that republicans tied to one of donald trump's primaries campaigns initially funded the contract with fusion gps. and after the primaries, the democrats did. but it was the dnc or the clinton campaign or some other democratic donor. that information was not clear. [multiple speakers] >> wait! one at a time. >> in 2012 mitt romney was asked in presidential debate when he thinks the biggest go to america is. he says russia. barack obama said excuse me, 1980 called and they would like your foreign-policy debt. i was on the show couple of months ago. and the brother of his chief of staff said this investigation was so important goes to the bedrock of democracy. now we find out that the dnc funded a dossier that relied as he said unto senior officials to go into this and the dossier
may have been used by the fbi by the federal government to get a pfizer warrant >> we do not know that. >> cnn reported this. they say may have been used to get a warrant to listen in on the phone because of his senior member of the trump campaign. that is outrageous. that is the bedrock of our democracy. [multiple speakers] >> of 20 seconds and then we have to break. >> agree that too many people in my party under an estimated politically the threat of russia back in 2012 election. we should played for bought into that more. what he did come with the president and his campaign or not the president i'm sorry i do not want to overstep. wet donald trump jr. and his associates, when they met with someone who has clear ties to the kremlin
>> why is that different than the clinton campaign? i will give you the final word. >> thank you. the free beacon website was the first to invest in this kind of research on republicans. >> so that the russians. >> they didn't. they were doing research. christopher steele publicly then -- [multiple speakers] >> they did not go to the russians. they were simply involved in domestic research. that is a different thing than having christopher steele go to the kremlin and talk to talk to kremlin officials and get their >> our research is dirty. surprise, surprise! should it be relied on? no. should be a major part of our campaigns? no. >> congresswoman jerry think it's appropriate for a political party to use senior criminal officials for this
research? >> no, i don't. let's find out more. let's, let mueller find out the truth. >> thank you panel, we will see you a little later if we have time left. we come back, open warfare with president trump and what it means for the gop. ohio governor john kasich is next. with our allstate agent, and i know that we have accident forgiveness. so the incredibly minor accident that i had tonight... four weeks without the car. okay, yep. good night. with accident forgiveness, your rates won't go up just because of an accident. switching to allstate is worth it.
we're on a mission to show drip coffee drinkers, it's time to wake up to keurig. wakey! wakey! rise and shine! oh my gosh! how are you? well watch this. i pop that in there. press brew. that's it. so rich. i love it. that's why you should be a keurig man! full-bodied. are you sure you're describing the coffee and not me? >> this week open warfare broke
out between two republican senators and president trump. jeff flake joined bob corcoran questioning the presence -- and then estimate he also will not seek reelection next year. the criticism highlights the growing debate in the gop about the future of the party. jenny now we have ohio republican governor and a frequent trump critic, john kasich. welcome back to "fox news sunday". >> thank you, thank you for having me. >> i want to starts with some of jeff flake speech on the floor of the senate this week here it is. >> we must stop pretending that the degradation of our politics and conduct of some in the
executive branch are normal. when such behavior emanates from the top of our government, it is something else. it is dangerous to a democracy. >> governor, do you agree with the senator that the conduct of the trump presidency's dander stone democracy? >> i would not go that far. i would say with people are frustrated in the country, the fact that it anybody can get along with anybody down there. i focus on the policy, things i agree with on the trump administration knows that i disagree upon. i have never gotten into questioning people's motives or their confidence. i'm very concerned about policy. and chris, really was happening inside of the party is there is debate. about whether the country should look inward and withdraw and take care of itself or whether the country are to look outward and involve issues of trade and immigration and the relationship with allies. and the most interesting thing
that's coming chris that you should focus on at some point, we are seeing a rise of millennial's and generation x in the 2018 election. they are not going to equal the baby boomers and what does that mean? they think profoundly differently than what is inward -looking group of republicans care about. because they care about the environment, they do not want to focus on all of the social issues. they understand america's place in the world, they are comfortable with global outreach. it is immigration, another one. so what will happen over time is that the generation x and millennial's would begin to overtake the baby boomers and it will mean a profound shift in the way the republican party and democratic party function and the question is to some sense, there are programs because right now, they are leaning independent. the question is who appeals to them? i have been to think outward approach of our country is the better one.
>> i am going to get to specific issues in a moment but i do want to pursue this with the philosophy of the republican party steve bannon says that they made tough speeches but basically, the bottom line is they announced that they are quitting. and there was silence from other republicans, can one argue that what you call the inward looking, the populist nationalist wing of the republican party is taking over? >> no. i don't think so. i think the book of the republican party. and i have been in the republican party since i was a college student. it is one that believes in the fact that america has a place in the world. reagan talked about this. advances humanity. i agree. i think the revolt of the republican party believes that immigration provides energy to our country. i think the bulk of the republican party believes that america is special and has a place in the world in which to
advance freedom and free enterprise and those things. i think this move towards nationalism or looking inward, and a lot of loud voices but i don't happen to think it is the book. and we will have to see over times. but for that, that debate to some degree will be settled on the demographics in the near future. maybe not today and not tomorrow but soon, it will be decided by the new wave of new thinking by these young people who can bring a lot of energy to the republican party and the conservative movement. >> let's talk about some specific issues. because this will be played out at least until the next in terms of wasabi. they will unveil the tax plan this week. according to reports there will be big cuts in corporate taxes. there will be a dramatic hit to the debt, perhaps as much as $2 trillion increased national debt that we will be taking on. is that the right way for the party and the country to go on
tax policy? >> well, chris, here is the thing. you need to have faster economic growth. our economic growth over the last couple of decades has been anemic. and that means people cannot get work. it means that we do not have growth and opportunity in all of the things that people want. i favor a tax bill. the corporate taxes are too high. we cannot compete as effectively and some companies hightailed out of america because of it. i do think we need a tax bill. when it comes to how to pay for it, i think in that case, having to believe that entitlements have to be reviewed. and it may be separate from the tax bill but it needs to happen because debt will have to -- it will swallow us up. i have been able to cut taxes because we have a budget requirement, instead of spending more government we gave money back to people. as a result in ohio now we are up 490,000 private sector jobs and since i've coming out is up from a loss of 350.
so lower taxes do matter. better regulation matters. i think that is why the market is doing better right now. because the trump administration has been moving away from stringent regulations to more commonsense regulations and it has helped the economy to grow. >> on immigration, the president says he is willing to make a deal to protect the so-called dreamers.people brought into the country as children. but in return, he wants funding for his wallet and he wants tougher, more stringent limits on illegal immigration. your reaction? >> i do not agree on really ratcheting down the number is legal immigrants that can come into this country. this is always been high-octane power for the country. it brings people in with a lot of energy and a lot of new ideas. of course we need to have a secure border. everyone believes that. but to begin ratcheting down the number of people that can legally come here, i do not support that. in terms of daca and these kids
that came here, one kids over the other day he came in he was seven months old i think. he is not 27. he is where he will happen to him here that is nonsense! let the pressure off of those young people. they are contributing to our country. and the daca thing, they should not be part of a negotiation. let them stay in america. you will not have to give citizenship but let them stay in this country if they have been law-abiding. they are contributing. >> we begin with the speech on the senate and i like to end with this. >> when the next generation asks us, why didn't you do something? why didn't you speak of? what are we going to say? >> governor, when the next generation asks? >> i have spoken more than anybody! but mine is not personal, modest policy. i have looked at what we have done in ohio. we are not a party that cuts anybody out in ohio. my administration has included everybody.if the top does other people at the bottom
ought to have hope. as a result of that i have high job approval, my last reelection was overwhelming. and i'm a believer that everybody should be given an opportunity, not just those at the top but also those who are struggling to get ahead. -- >> if you feel so strongly about the direction of the party and you do not like the way that some people in the trump waiting want to take the country, i have asked you before, why not consider at least running for president in 2020 for the republican nomination against president trump? >> because chris, despite 2017. i am trying to be the best governor i can be. i am not thinking about what is going to happen.what will happen with me politically, i have no idea! there is so much of people in the country right now. no one knows what will happen next week. look, all i want to do is contribute to bringing a calm voice that involves inclusion and everybody growing. where that will take me, i
really don't know. but i can say at this point, i am not plotting or planning anything like that chris. that is just not where my head is right now. i am going to be a voice for the new generation. the next generation. and for what has traditionally been strong in the party and i am going to do my best to promote that. and do you know what? i think it's going pretty well. >> governor john kasich, thank you. thank you for coming in today. always good to talk to you, sir. >> thank you, sir. god bless. >> we bring back our panel for the big reveal. we find out with this week what is in the republican tax plan. plus the new war on drugs. love the president plans to fight the growing opioid epidemic. baa baa black sheep,
people would break on taxes making it easier for them to plan for the future. >> this is a shakedown of the middle class. >> house speaker paul ryan and democratic leader nancy pelosi already fighting about who will benefit from the gop tax plan before we even find out what is in it. we are back now with the panel to talk about this. they have been very secretive
about this but we've heard some elements of this. we also have heard this externally timetable that they are laying out. they will pass it through the house in the senate. different versions by thanksgiving. what you make of this? >> i think it is possible. on think this is the secret process. we have an outline that came out. more details, we honor the basic structure. think chairman brady has done an incredible job putting this together. >> you like what you are hearing about the plan? >> i do.this is what will happen now. every single correct force of the status quo in washington dc, the national realtors association, homebuilders, high-tech states, they will come in and try to pick apart the plan and protect their little part of it. i think momentum and speed is something that unfortunately you need at this stage to get the plan which has been talked about in the types of broad strokes that we have the vast majority of americans that need
and want to know before the national realtors association is just making totally common argument about themselves and what's good for themselves. this is a tax cut that will be good for people who do not itemize, those that you itemize, a great plan for the country. we need to get it done before the forces of the status quo and special interest tear apart. >> mo, what we know, is this a good plan? and the fun we just found out grew by three percent for the second quarter in a row. if they get the tax plan and discontinue growth, won't republicans in 2018 be able to go to the country with a stronger economy? >> they are banking on it. there banking on be able to go with this because so far they don't have a very good track record of getting anything done. they know if they do not get this done there in very serious trouble with voters. whether or not it is a good plan we will see how it plays out. so far i hear it does not sound very good. just to toss it back out the hypocrisy, the fact that republicans are now okay with a
blueprint that is going to blow a $2.4 trillion hole in the deficit, when people who were, -- >> if you're going to accuse me of hypocrisy, we have a spending problem in this country. the text could you bring and what is needed. [multiple speakers] >> republicans have not called for this trillion dollars and cuts. >> republicans are completely gutless when it comes to spending. no one can deny that but that is not hypocrisy on the part of anyone in the panel. >> i'm the saying the republican party that has been fighting to rein in the deficit, seems to be okay now. right? [multiple speakers] >> i hate to interrupt but i want to talk about one of the subject because it is too important not to. another big developing this because the president declared a public health emergency in terms of the opioid crisis. but he did not declare a national emergency which would
have allowed him more funding which resulted in two very different responses. >> it is time to liberate our communities on this drug addiction. it has never been this way. we can be the generation that ends the opioid epidemic. >> i would say to the president on that, show me the money. >> why, you don't know but your speculation, why didn't the president, as part of this announcement say, i'm going to ask congress for x amount of money. failing to do so did he step on his own announcements? >> yes, i was surprised he did not take that step.it seems a natural and appropriate step for the president when he says this is a health emergency. we need more money to fight it in addition to the defensibility. there was a surprise. because republicans and democrats will support more funding to fight opioids. it should have been included as
a statement. it is still up to congress. i was surprised that he did not call for it. >> congresswoman harmon, your thoughts. >> he did the right thing. he should have funded. but there been a lot of missed opportunities here we talk about tax reform. penny case at which i was a part of what have been a great way to do this and then simpson, which was originated in the obama administration should have been seized by president obama and speaker ryan. and what i put on the table the framework that would make the most sense which is reforming entitlements, reforming taxes and cutting spending. and if we can't get there and we're just going to do this one-sided tax bill, i don't think it is going to stimulate the economic growth. >> since way back to texas. the key thing is to make the economy bloom again. if that can happen that is the best way. >> that is what i just said! >> good for middle income people. then they become upper middle income people?
that's why this is the heart and soul of republicans. if they cannot find unity as a caucus because of individual provisions, what is the purpose of having republicans in washington? this is what it comes down to. and if they do pass this? >> then sky's the limit. if everything was of republicans are in great shape. they delivered to everything they promised. that is what americans are looking for. >> we'll talk about this on the commercial. thank you panel, see you next sunday. up next, power players of the week. with powerful new hollywood film shows the real struggles of soldiers returning home from iraq and afghanistan. when heartburn hits fight back fast with tums chewy bites. fast relief in every bite. crunchy outside. chewy inside. tum tum tum tum tums chewy bites.
picture. we have not had that kind of film that tells the story of soldiers coming home from iraq and afghanistan and the challenges they face. at least we had headed until now. is our power players of the week. >> would get scrutinize if you mess up a military film. those guys tear you up. >> milestone is the start of the new movie thank you for your service. the riveting story of a group of soldiers who come home from iran. jason who wrote american sniper, wrote and directed this film. >> the step of the battlefield, step of the airplane they come home and the memories and the trauma of the war continued to reverberate through them and into their lives here. >> this story starts small. >> one day on the battlefield in the next day like in the movie your cooking pancakes for your daughter. >> how long have you been ethically. >> i want chocolate chip smiley face pancakes.
>> she doesn't like chocolate, >> okay! >> they get back into being a father. >> suddenly things are little alien and a little off. sometimes it can throw them sideways. >> estimates are one and five this soldiers deployed to iraq and afghanistan suffers from some form of posttraumatic stress. the movie shows many of them go to the va. looking for help. >> there backed up, it could be 6 to 9 months. >> are you kidding me? do you think these guys can wait that long? >> these are really good people operating in a very big kind of broken bureaucracy. podiatrist, your trauma experts, your brain surgeons. and so they're trying to do everything for all people. and it is challenging. because the movie is based on the story of sergeant adam shuman who served in iraq. [video]
>> this country is good at fighting war. how are we have bringing the soldiers back home?>> they always knows the price of war and the sacrifices these guys make it we nullify logically the brains, everything is different. there a different person when they come back. >> the name of your movies thank you for your service which we all say we see a soldier. it makes us feel better. the sense i get is, you think that is kind of empty. >> it makes me feel better. but what i'm not doing is i am not offering to have that soldier tell me about his service. and unload some of the on me. >> that is the message of the movie. you connect the front line to the home front. and start a conversation. >> you never told me you are here. don't spare me the details. >> how did these guys feel? how did this happen? >> hope this will become i hope
you will see this and understand more about what the veterans have been through. so they can offer them an open door. >> there is nothing easy about these guys are soldiers and they keep fighting to get better. to be a good father, a good husband. >> hope that they close of the space between the civilians and the military and what the understanding of what they have done and the service that they have given. >> thank you for your service opened in theaters nationwide this weekend. it is a tough powerful movie. now this program, be sure to tune into fox news channel this monday, tomorrow, for our new primetime lineup. starting with mark there at 70 standby tucker carlson and sean hannity after greater than the debuts of the ingram angle with laura increment 10 and fox news at night with shannon at 11. you will not want to miss it. that is it for today. have a great week! we will see you next "fox news sunday".
on #mediabuzz the washington post reveals that the hillary clinton and d&c funded the dossier. >> i think is that what they've done with this faith dossier. it was made out and i understand they pay a tremendous amount of money and hillary clinton always denied it. >> the democrats hired foreign agents to dig up dirt on donald trump. look, that maybe it happens all the time in politics but it seems really cd. >> we were all worried about this meeting from two bit